Case Case Study : Jespersen V. Harrah 's

1188 Words5 Pages
Tony Luong (Group 2) Bus 80 Date: September 17, 2014 Case Brief Case Name: Jespersen v. Harrah’s., 444 F. 3d 1104; 2006 U.S. App LEXIS 9307(9th Cir.) 2006 Facts: Darlene Jespersen, the plaintiff, has worked at a casino named Harrah’s as a bartender for twenty years. On February 2000, Harrah’s has created a program, “The Beverage Department Image Transformation Program” at twenty other Harrah’s location, including its casino at reno. Jesperson did not agree with this policy argued that Harrah’s new policy, “Personal Best”, has set a standard where men and women were going to dress similar while women are required to wear makeup. This Policy wasn’t enforced until April 2000 where they became more stricted about it. The reason for the “Personal Best” Policy was for workers to look more professional and nice while working. Both men and women were to wear harrah’s standard uniform dress code, black pants,white shirt, black vest, and a black bow tie. Jesperson wasn’t offended by the dress code but by how this policy required women to put on makeup. The cause of this case was that Jesperson disapprove of this policy because she refused to wear make-up. Harrah’s took action of this policy by letting Jesperson go because she did not follow the rule. Through out the years of working at Harrah’s, Jespersen has not worn makeup while working and has been following every policy Harrah’s has given her, so when this policy came out, she felt uncomfortable to follow through. Jesperson

    More about Case Case Study : Jespersen V. Harrah 's

      Open Document